Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Does Open Source Need Quality Standards?

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the if-it-compiles-it-works-right dept.

underpar writes "This Techworld.com article reports that a UK group called the Open Source Consortium is being officially launched today. The article further states that the goal of the group is to respond to claims that switching to open source is more expensive than using Microsoft products and to help smaller companies compete with Sun and IBM for open source contracts. They say they will not compete with other open source groups and they intend to eventually come to the US. The hype-filled about us section of their site says their Quality Standard Certification provides a "simple framework for self-assessment and performance improvement." The question of whether this is useful or even wanted in the US still remains to be answered."

3 of 223 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Dumb overgeneralization by Kick+the+Donkey · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I really didn't want to sow the seeds of a consipracy theory discussion here. I voted for Kerry, I'm sorry that Bush won (for all our sakes). However, I don't think there was a vast right wing consiparcy (at least, in this case. They are out there...) to de-fraud the voting process.

    As an American, I am appalled at the irregularities, though. I do want something done about that.

    --
    /. is a bunch of nerds at a million typewriters. It's not a political conspiracy determined to undermine your beliefs.
  2. Re:Dumb overgeneralization by Cereal+Box · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    How did you guys ever come up with conspiracy theories that explain why a Republican candidate won the presidency before the advent of electronic voting machines?

  3. Re:Dumb overgeneralization by Grishnakh · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    This doesn't require a conspiracy theory. Back then, people actually did vote for them. However, when you say "Republican", I do not think you know what that means.

    20+ years ago, "Republican" was a party that held an ideology that included things like smaller government, less social services, etc. Yes, they were right-wing, but not to an extremist fashion.

    Now, when you talk about the "Republican" party, you're probably talking about the neo-conservatives. This is not your father's Republican party. This party advocates a strange mix of Christian fundamentalism, and turning a blind eye to any type of illegal and unethical behavior by big corporations. Basically, it's fascism.

    Now, how they got elected in recent years: it doesn't really require a conspiracy theory, though such theories do help to explain very questionable numbers in certain close-call voting regions. Basically, the US population has had the wool pulled over their eyes by the neo-cons, with appeals to religious fundmentalism, and constant fear of "terrorists", so that they don't see the really important issues affecting us.